Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Electric / hybrid aircraft propulsion (NOT cars)

Jim Bede understood selling aeronautical dreams to dreamers (look him up if the BD-5 saga is unfamilar) but it seems to me the difference today is a more widespread lack of critical thinking, particularly towards science and technology. It’s going to be interesting to see how the industry backs down from tens of electric aircraft projects which have no chance of succeeding based on current technology. I’m contributing to one, very interesting and it pays the bills, but the motivation for the project is the need to appear engaged with technical trends, versus anybody seeing that there is substantial untapped potential available within current technology. The little trainers might make sense, like commercial ultralights made sense for some buyers in the 80s.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 29 Jun 14:22

An electric Caravan will be flying this year. 1000 miles endurance it seems.

I am sure a Caravan can lift enough batteries to fly 1000nm but it won’t be able to carry much else, and you will need your own private fast breeder reactor to recharge the batteries after each flight

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

I am sure a Caravan can lift enough batteries to fly 1000nm

It can’t. Back of the envelope: perhaps 150 miles.

Biggin Hill

I know, I know, various “revolutionary” batteries announced to be in development and probably various more not announced, but here’s one that caught my eye:

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/xnrgi-develops-ev-battery-tech-that-extends-range-to-700-miles/

280% increase in range for EV’s at the same weight, and fast recharge. That would put a large segment of GA on the map, in 5+ years though.

What I like about it is that there seems not to be a jump in technology, just a more effective form factor. And using “obsolete” tech from the IC industry.

Ah well, I am old enough to know that there is probably a catch somewhere. Opinions?

Last Edited by aart at 27 Jul 06:11
Private field, Mallorca, Spain

There is no obvious catch, but given this is a promotional piece, there wouldn’t be

It does sound good.

It still leaves you with the “if more than three houses buy a Tesla and install a fast charger, the transformer at the end of the street will blow up” problem, and its translations all the way back up the grid…

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

RR buying Siemens is from a cost standpoint not a good thing. RR are known to gouge their customers on engines.

https://www.zeroavia.com/

Apparently they did a test with a PA46 airframe

Private field, Mallorca, Spain
Private field, Mallorca, Spain

This report from Germany is interesting.

And if they cannot get less CO2 from cars, there is no chance at all of getting it from a plane which runs at a constant high power.

The researchers compared the carbon dioxide output for a Tesla Model 3 (electric) and a Mercedes C220d sedan (diesel). The Mercedes releases about 141 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer driven, including the carbon emitted to drill, refine, and transport its fuel. The Tesla releases between 156 and 181 grams, including battery production. Mining and processing the lithium, cobalt, and manganese used for batteries consume a lot of energy. A Tesla Model 3 battery, for example, represents between 11 and 15 metric tons of carbon dioxide. Given a battery lifetime of 10 years and an annual travel distance of 15,000 kilometers, 73 to 98 grams of carbon dioxide are emitted per kilometer.
Germany’s growing reliance on coal for electricity generation was also considered in the study. The country relies on coal when the wind is not blowing and the sun is not shining. As a result, charging a Tesla in Bavaria releases about 83 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometer driven.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

A proposal for an electric 10-seat aircraft – the Scylax

The specs are interesting. Is this at all feasible?

The speed and range suggests it will run for just about 1 hour! Or maybe the 300km is at some lower speed, so maybe 1.5hrs?

Fuel planning is going to be like in a military fast jet.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top